On Jan 3, 2008, at 10:34 PM, Craig White wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 17:47 -0700, Chris Gehlker wrote:
>> On Jan 3, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Craig White wrote:
>>
>>> But that's not the point I'm making in the column. What's new in the
>>> Howell case is the decision by lawyers for the recording industry to
>>> argue that even a legally-obtained CD may not be transferred to an
>>> MP3
>>> file on your computer. That argument can be found here, on page 15:
>>>
>>> http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=atlantic_howell_071207RIAASupplementalBrief
>>
>> No it can't. There is simply nothing on page 15 that is remotely like
>> that. Are you perhaps reading "unauthorized" as synonymous with
>> "illegal"? Perhaps you are reading "and" as synonymous with "or"?
> ----
> that was the authors own words and the authors description of his
> intent
> for his story (actually, now just a partial since you have removed
> some
> of the context).
>
> The reason that I included the amplification by the author was because
> it so completely spoke to your statement about why the author was
> wrong...
Who is this author you are talking about? You said "What's new in the
Howell case is the decision by lawyers for the recording industry to
argue that even a legally-obtained CD may not be transferred to an MP3
file on your computer" and referenced as specific page on a specific
document as evidence." But the page you referenced simply doesn't say
what you think it does. Just read it again. Note the "and".
>
>
>
>>> wrong? how?
>>
>> By saying that the RIAA was suing Howell for merely ripping files
>> for
>> his personal use.
>
> There's no question that the predicate changed from plaintiff's
> original
> motion for summary judgment and the controversial plaintiff's second
> motion for summary judgment. The change should be simple enough for
> you
> to understand...that the legitimate copies of these music files
> automatically became unauthorized copies merely by the presence of
> file
> sharing software. The plaintiff does not even allege that any
> downloading of those files occurred.
"Unauthorized" simply means 'not authorized'. The copies made by
Howell were never authorized simply because Howell never had a letter
from Atlantic Records stating "We authorize you to copy the following
songs:..." The didn't "become" unauthorized. All of us who have ripped
CDs have "unauthorized" copies of the music on our computers. The
doesn't mean we have illegal copies. Copyright law gives us the right
to make copies for our personal use without authorization from anyone
so long as we retain an "authorized" copy, the original CD. Copyright
law also gives us the right to "distribute" the authorized copy by
selling it to a used record store or giving it as a gift provided we
first destroy all the unauthorized copies we have made. The RIAA
attorneys are simply saying that even if Howell legally purchased all
these songs and and therefor has a right to give them away, he is not
giving away the copies that he legally purchased.
>
>
> The nexus is obvious, I'm disappointed you don't see it. Computers are
> replete with file sharing software. When the RIAA shifts their focus
> from kazaa to SMB/NFS/etc., are you finally going to see the light?
I have music files ripped from legal CDs on my computers. I have a
file server running on one of them. I have taken reasonable
precautions to ensure that said file server is not accessible from
outside my household. I invite and encourage you to share this
information with the RIAA or any of it's members so long as you
include the part about the reasonable precautions. I am absolutely
confident that I am at no risk from the RIAA for sharing music files
within my own household. So go ahead, Craig. Forward this post to any
record company executive that you choose. We both know that they won't
take any action against me.
--
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a
proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and
oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us.
-Paul Valery, poet and philosopher (1871-1945)
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)